Sennheiser MKH 416 vs. MKH 60

Whatever side of the debate one is on, I think if you're talking
strictly VALUE, you'll find few who would argue that the MKH-60 is
TWICE as good as the 416.

I personally prefer the 416. In practical terms, the difference
really comes down to which tone you prefer and what your application
will be. I do not concur with your comments of "better pickup" or
"longer range" from the MKH60 -- the main difference is the pickup
pattern is a little wider on the MKH-60 (which can help you or hurt
you, depending upon your application and your operator) and the tone
has slightly different characteristics. Both are good at taking
abuse, rejecting RF, and working in challenging weather environments,
and the difference between the two in those regards -- as well as the
difference in self noise -- is pretty negligible in real-world
practice.

At the end of the day, some like tea with honey and some like tea with
sugar. I don't think there's a "clearly better" argument to be made
here.

Happy shopping!

Regards,

Noah Timan



On Jun 17, 7:30 pm, Kevin <kchen... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> Been reading for a while, but this is my first time posting.  Thanks
> for all the valuable information, it has helped me out a lot.
>
> Anyway, I'm thinking about buying up a package and I have a choice
> between a used Senn mkh416 (800$) or a brand new Senn mkh60
> (1500$).
>
> What do you guys think?  I work on a lot of different types of shows
> (reality, docs, features, news) so I'm looking for something
> versatile.  I'm also looking for the BEST VALUE.  People have told me
> that the mkh60 has a better pickup and longer range, but is it worth
> 700?  Is one better in certain situations than the other?  Is one more
> durable?
>
> All the advice would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kevin
 >> Stay informed about: Sennheiser MKH 416 vs. MKH 60 

If you are looking for "BEST VALUE" it seems we are
debating used vs. new rather than which mic is better.
As was pointed out, if the condition is good and the mic
was well cared for, a used 416 will still serve you very well.
make sure it is p48 unless you are OK with T power.
The $700 difference buys you a nice shockmount and windscreen
which either mic is useless without...

Glen P.

> > What do you guys think?  I work on a lot of different types of shows
> > (reality, docs, features, news) so I'm looking for something
> > versatile.  I'm also looking for the BEST VALUE.  People have told me
> > that the mkh60 has a better pickup and longer range, but is it worth
> > 700?  Is one better in certain situations than the other?  Is one more
> > durable?
>
> > All the advice would be greatly appreciated.
>
> > Thanks,
>
> > Kevin
 >> Stay informed about: Sennheiser MKH 416 vs. MKH 60 

The 60 is much lighter (than 416) and, not only have less noise, it is
more sensitive too (wich will yield even less system noise)
But it also have a not-very-sexy low freq response.
It will stand humidity, RFI, EMI like a champion.

The CS3e "isolates" sound sources very well (excellent directionality
for low freq), a more natural low end, but it is sensitive to heavy
humidity.

I like the "schoepsy" sound of the Neumann but it just does not have
enough reach imho.

I have both.

Fernando
 >> Stay informed about: Sennheiser MKH 416 vs. MKH 60 

On Jun 21, 11:31 am, Fernando <f....TakeThisOut@ran.es> wrote:
> The 60 is much lighter (than 416) and, not only have less noise, it is
> more sensitive too (wich will yield even less system noise)

I'm curious if anyone has had a legitimate real-world problem with
self-noise from a 416. Maybe I'm missing something, but I tend to
think such discussions are purely theoretical. I can't imagine anyone
actually hearing that noise in a practical setting to the point where
it would be recognizable, much less pointedly detrimental. I tend to
believe that you'll hear other system noise from other components in
your setup (preamp, mixer bus, recorder input eg) long before you'll
hear system noise from that mic.

> The CS3e "isolates" sound sources very well (excellent directionality
> for low freq), a more natural low end, but it is sensitive to heavy
> humidity.

It's a great mic, but can be very fragile in hard environments
(particularly in regard to RFI) and packs less "punch" than its
Sennheiser counterparts. It also doesn't have the prettiest tone I've
ever heard, in my opinion.

> I like the "schoepsy" sound of the Neumann but it just does not have
> enough reach imho.

It really depends upon the application. The 81 can be a great happy
medium for when a hyper is not enough but a 416/60/CS3/etc is too
much.

The bottom line is that there's never a "one size fits all" microphone
for every scenario. If you plug the same choice into every situation,
there will be benefits in some, there will be drawbacks in others, and
there are tonal issues which boil down to personal preference (and
operator ability).

.02 nvt
 >> Stay informed about: Sennheiser MKH 416 vs. MKH 60 

sensitivity
 >> Stay informed about: Sennheiser MKH 416 vs. MKH 60